4.3 Article

Trends, patterns, and networks of illicit wildlife trade in Nepal: A national synthesis

Journal

CONSERVATION SCIENCE AND PRACTICE
Volume 2, Issue 9, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/csp2.247

Keywords

biodiversity conservation; Nepal; threatened species; trade connectivity; trade networks; wildlife trade

Funding

  1. Ministry of Forest and Environment, Nepal
  2. WWF/USAID/Hariyo Ban Program
  3. Zoological Society of London, Nepal

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Illicit wildlife trade may have devastating consequences for Nepal's wildlife populations given its increasing national and global connectivity and proximity with large Indian and Chinese markets. Despite its potential impacts, our understanding about trends, patterns and networks of illicit wildlife trade in Nepal is very limited. Here, we provide a thorough and comprehensive national assessment of such trade in Nepal using 5 years (2011 through 2015) of data on wildlife seizures and arrests (n= 830) collected from 73 districts. Nearly 87% of arrests included seizures, and globally threatened species were confiscated from 56% of total arrests. There were increasing trends of arrest cases over the time period for all species (p= 0.03), leopards (p= 0.02) and red pandas (p= 0.002), and a decreasing trend for rhinoceros (p= 0.04). Seizures of multiple species-especially tigers, leopards, and pangolin-in arrest cases were suggestive of international organized criminal linkages, whereas individual small-scale seizures were likely for local, species-specific markets. The trade networks suggested connections between species core habitats (poaching sites), cities (collection sites), and transit routes between India and China (international markets). Our results show that wildlife trade, except for rhinoceros, is increasing and trade nodes along districts bordering China and India are suggestive of large, international networks.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available